Conference 7.286::digital

    
    IMHO, a term usually used by someone when referring to "other" people,
    which never includes the person using the term.  One could also deduce
    that the person using the term has little compassion for others, is
    self-centered, and does not hold to the concept of the responsibility
    of all management in a corporation to retrain, motivate, redeploy and
    lead where all employees are always and continuously contributing
    members of an organization, each doing his or her fair share of the
    work, and each contributing creative thinking leading to effective
    changes to continuous build a more successful company.
    

deadwood: That wood which a woodchuck would not chuck when chucking wood.

    Yes having the ill-defined "deadwood" around is demoralizing, but, in my
    opinion, no more so than living with arrogant universal experts always
    ready to pitch in with advice as to what other people should be doing.
    
    I should hesitate to start pointing out the former lest I be mistaken
    for one of the latter.
    
    John H.

    
    Everyone starts out having a useful job.
    
    Those who's jobs lose their usefulness are unfortunate. (At one time or
    another, this applies to nearly everybody).
    
    Those who don't seek other useful jobs are deadwood.
    
    (And before you trigger the flame thrower, please note that I said
    "seek", not "find".)
    
    "Deadwood is always the fault of management" is as silly a statement as
    "Divorce is always the fault of the [insert gender]."
    
    Signs of deadwood:
    
    	o  emits hollow sound when struck hard
    
    	o  can't support own weight
    
    	o  generates wacky ideas, then tries to arrive at "concensus" by
           network bombardment until opposition dies of fatigue
    

    Deadwood, as opposed to livewood (or greenwood), is incapable of
    producing (new shoots, as it were).  Analogizing people (workers) as
    plant material is flawed logic (obviously).  We are all capable of
    contributing, it's application of human potential that is lacking.  
    
    There is a saying, that there are no poor learners, only bad teachers.
    Try transferring (analogizing) that logic to Digital's workforce. 

    deadwood are individuals who are capable of, but unwilling, to
    contribute.  They exist everywhere; in every walk of life.
    
    Lazy people have to work too, so they say.

    is this definition like-
    
    Recession - your neighbor is out of a job
    
    Depression - you are out of a job
    
    	-Barry-
    

    
    
    A late 19th century western United States town served by a stage coach
    line.---- or
    
    The person who will not take affirmative action, who will not make a
    definitive statement and MAY admit they are in the same meeting with
    you if pressed hard and long enough.
     

According to the American Heritage Dictionary:

deadwood (ded'wood) n. anything burdensome or superfluous.

As an idiom in american business, the term's definition normally replaces the 
standard definition's use of "anything" with "anyone".

					...mark

    Funny.  I first heard the word "deadwood" referring to people a number
    of years ago at another company.  It sort of rubbed me the wrong way
    then too.
    
    From an Ecologic perspective, deadwood isn't so bad. As it decays, it
    provides food for new growth.  Matter of fact, a forest cannot continue
    without deadwood.  So I guess I never really bought the analogy.
    
    However, those fallen logs that impede the progress of those struggling
    up the paths of improvement have always been a thorn in my side. 
    Problem is that those fallen logs sometimes appear very much alive!

I'm surprised noone has mentioned the bowling connection, which is where
I always thought the term "deadwood" came from.
In bowling, deadwood is (are) the pins already knocked down, hence they
no longer contribute to the game.
In tenpins and duckpins, the deadwood is swept aside and taken out of
play between balls of a frame.
In candlepins (an apparently uniquely New England and Atlantic Canda
variation of the game), deadwood is left lying among the "live wood."
It contributes to the game by making otherwise difficult or impossible shots
possible (if you hit it right), or it gets in the way and blocks access
to standing pins.

- tom]

    A couple of permutations in the Digital context:
    
    1) Deadwood
    
    An employee who expends as much energy avoiding work as would normally
    have been expended in performing the original task.
    
    	Believe it or not, I have seen too many examples of this type
    	of Deadwood. People who you can bet the farm will *NEVER* look
    	for things to do if they are currently unoccupied. Also, for people
    	who sell, or assist Sales (this includes consultants, of which I am
    	one) those employees who wait for the phone to ring, as opposed to
    	making the call.
    
    2) Deadwood
    
    
    Those employees who, if fired, or left the company, would be the last
    to get a job in the outside world.
    
    
    	How many people do you know who you would sooner drink molten
    	lead rather than give them a reference for another job? How
    	much added value do they possess. Moreover, what is this employee
    	doing to adapt to changing times? Is this person learning new
    	technologies? For God's sake, DEC has some excellent training
    	programs, why do some people avoid them? Because more knowledge
    	equals more work/responsibility. Sounds pretty backward to most
    	of us, but let me assure you that these are words to live by for
    	some. In the 'Free Market', what is their 'hire-ability?'
    
    Randy
    
    

    >	How many people do you know who you would sooner drink molten
    >	lead rather than give them a reference for another job? 
    
    	Depends whether they were going to work for a major
    	competitor..
    

In my 20+ years in this business I've run across more than a few folks whose
entire career seemed to be the result of managers giving them great 
recommendations in order to get RID of them.  It's easier to slide the deadwood
down the hall than to push it out the door.

-dave

    Deadwood: Someone who thinks that life (or Digital, or someone else -
    anything but him/herself) owes him/her a living.
    
    JKP
    

    
    Each one of us should be very careful.  In this rapidly evolving and
    changing technology field we are in, each of us stand the chance to
    become deadwood.
    
    None of us start as that.  We are each hired for a specific valid task. 
    However, if each person do not put in the individual effort to keep up
    with the time, the writing-on-the-wall has started.
    
    Sad to say, there are bound to be people in this category in any large
    company.  And sadder still, there are some who absolutely refuse to
    move on, even when given the chance.  It's that comfort-zone syndrome.
    So the response is to ignore it and continue keeping the head in the
    sand.  Maybe the problem will go away.
    
    At this point, a deadwood becomes a dead-weight.
    
    - Phil

	re .17:

>>>    Each one of us should be very careful.  In this rapidly evolving and
>>>    changing technology field we are in, each of us stand the chance to
>>>    become deadwood.

	Absolutely true. I have a few observations on this subject
	of "deadwood", and although I know it's not popular, I do
	feel it's extremely important. So here goes.

	First of all, some people object to the very term "deadwood".
	They feel it's dehumanizing and contemptuous. I agree. However,
	it does express something very important about the life of any
	organization. If we think of "deadwood" as an organizational
	syndrome, rather than identifying it with specific people, we
	have a concept which is both more valuable and more acceptable.

	The point is that change is all about us. Life is a process
	of change - a "slow fire". Life is not the stuff that burns,
	it's the flame - the process of combustion.

	In the same way, a corporation like Digital is all the time
	adding new functions, new job roles, new offices and programs
	and strategies and functions. Almost all of these involve new
	job titles and gradually develop into new organizational
	hierarchies. These can all too easily become "empires" when
	they become self-perpetuating. Then we see many of the problems
	of which people complain over and over - arrogance, lack of attention
	to customers, the business, and employees, and so on.

	It's at the cutting edge - at the threshold of innovation, the
	flame - that the organization is at its best, fully focussed on
	its business opportunities and 100% adjusted to its markets.
	A good sales person epitomizes this state of flexibility: he or
	she wastes not one moment on process, learning or activities
	that do not directly support today's business. That's why we need
	to become far more alert to conditions in the field, at that
	vital interface where a Digital representative is meeting with
	a customer. 

	Everything else is overhead. And that is where the idea of
	"deadwood" is useful: department, teams, programs and offices
	are hardly ever closed down when their usefulness has departed.
	There are a number of reasons for this:

		- Shortsightedness. "This is what I did yesterday,
		  so this is what I'll do today and tomorrow..."

		- Lack of initiative. "If I make some creative
		  suggestions, the boss will just get mad at me".

		- Fear. "If we tell them that this department isn't
		  really necessary any more, we may be out of a job".

		- Ambition. "I spent five years getting to department
		  head. If I lose this group, I may not get another
		  chance. Let's muddy the waters and make it look
		  like all I need is another building and another 100
		  people..."

		- Self interest. "I'm well paid, respected, successful.
		  Why should I care what happens to Digital in the long
		  run? I'll be long gone by then".

		- Cynicism. "What's the point in my making sacrifices
		  for the company when nobody else will? I'll lose out
		  for nothing".

	The saddest thing, to me, is that if the "Digital core values"
	which Jack Smith declared (honesty, trust, openness, innovation
	and respect) really did prevail throughout the corporation, they
	would overcome ALL the above obstacles to progress.

	As far as employees becoming deadwood, it is happening all
	around - as Phil said in .17, to some degree it affects all
	of us. The striking thing is that Digital does not make any
	systematic attempt to preserve employees from becoming deadwood.
	On the contrary, by exploiting their current knowledge while
	refusing them adequate time for training and learning, it
	actively accelerates the process.

	Only those who are prepared to put in many extra hours (as
	I do, for example) can hope to avoid the exponential decay
	of the skills which make them valuable. At this point, having
	progressively lost their real skills, and learned in exchange
	only the fundamentally valueless skills of "getting things
	done in Digital" - they are ripe for "rightsizing".

	Jack Smith needs to realize that Digital itself must accept
	most of the responsibility for the "deadwood" syndrome. Only
	when each individual is fully valued for him or herself, when
	the core values do prevail throughout the management structure,
	will employees cease to become deadwood.

	The first thing that has to go is the traditional policy
	that "personal development and career planning is the responsibility
	of the individual". This is a recipe for selfishness, intrigue,
	and empire-building. It defeats cooperation, trust, wholehearted
	effort and honesty. It means that every employee is in open competition
	with other employees for the best career opportunities - and
	the majority fall at the first hurdle, which is realizing that
	"the rules are 'there are no rules'".

	Digital's greatest strength IS its people, their superb personal
	qualities and character, their informal, open-hearted readiness
	to cooperate, their willingness to go the extra mile. Once this
	asset is recognised, measured, and carefully developed, this
	company can REALLY start to show the world what it can do.

	/Tom